Being someone from the UK it is the norm when I travel around Europe to walk on to the apron to board an aircraft. However, in my many trips to the USA, I have only boarded an aircraft via ramp/airstairs once. In an age where the majority of US airports are full at many times of the day, why don't more US airports board remotely?

It does seem that very rarely in the USA does one deplane remotely.

Might it have to do with weather? It does seem that more of the US tends to (generally) have more extreme weather than Europe. In particular, the winter weather seems to be more extreme with subzero temperatures in hubs like ORD, DTW, BOS, MSP compared to major hubs in Europe. Just a guess.

With consolidation in the States, there also are not many airports that are gate constrained (or, perhaps more accurately, are significantly more gate constrained than runway constrained).

Themotionman wrote:

In an age where the majority of US airports are full at many times of the day...

That is not a factually correct statement. A few U.S. airports are heavily utilized much of the day: LAX, LGA, DCA among them. Some airports see a couple waves of use - they might have high gate utilization for a total of 2-3 hours a day. A majority of airports (that would be at least 200 with scheduled commercial passenger service) full at many times of day? That's just poor command of fact.

Why don't the few busy U.S. airports use remote stands? Two prominent reasons:

1. The busy airports don't have available apron space. (If they did, airports would be building concourses.)

2. U.S. passengers expect better. Remote stands are OK in Kona or Burbank where the weather is often good but I don't want them in Boston, Miami, or Dallas.

At PIE I had to wait an hour for a thunderstorm to pass through before they would let people off a plane because of a remote stand. If they had a normal jetway this wouldn't have happend. I think as others mentioned it is mostly weather. You usually only find them at good weather airports here now or for small commuter planes.

Related to weather; airport authorities don’t charge thru the lungs for terminal access and we don’t have carriers charging $19 for the ticket and $100 for extras like Ryan Air.

GF

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Related to weather; airport authorities don’t charge thru the lungs for terminal access and we don’t have carriers charging $19 for the ticket and $100 for extras like Ryan Air.

GF

Almost every airline except for WN charges for baggage. G4, NK, and F9 charge for even more and basic economy is starting to expands this to the US3 too.

USA has a law called ADA. Americans with disability act. “All reasonable efforts “ must be made so a wheelchair bound pax can fly without assistance or any prior notice .. if not they can seek corrective action .. no such law in other countries

COSPN wrote:

USA has a law called ADA. Americans with disability act. “All reasonable efforts “ must be made so a wheelchair bound pax can fly without assistance or any prior notice .. if not they can seek corrective action .. no such law in other countries

Almost. ADA does not apply to airlines. However, there is the Air Carrier Access Act, which is sort of like ADA, but applies to airlines instead.

Jshank83 wrote:

At PIE I had to wait an hour for a thunderstorm to pass through before they would let people off a plane because of a remote stand. If they had a normal jetway this wouldn't have happend. I think as others mentioned it is mostly weather. You usually only find them at good weather airports here now or for small commuter planes.

Thunderstorms typically lead to ground stops as a result of safety concerns when there is lightning in the area. What that means is that ground personnel are brought inside and not allowed to return to the ramp until a set period of time after a lightning strike has elapsed. In Canada I think that the rule is any lightning strike within 3 kms, there is a ground stop for 30 minutes - don't quote me on that though.

So, if there was a groundstop after the boarding bridge had been connected, maybe you wouldn't have had this problem. However, you would still be waiting for your bags if you'd checked one.

MIflyer12 wrote:

2. U.S. passengers expect better. Remote stands are OK in Kona or Burbank where the weather is often good but I don't want them in Boston, Miami, or Dallas.

Let's not confuse a "remote stand" for a "gate without a jet bridge" (such as KOA, BUR or PIE). A remote stand is where an airplane parks away from the terminal and is accessed by bus (or mobile lounge). Think Dulles in the '60s.

kavok wrote:

It does seem that very rarely in the USA does one deplane remotely.

Might it have to do with weather? It does seem that more of the US tends to (generally) have more extreme weather than Europe. In particular, the winter weather seems to be more extreme with subzero temperatures in hubs like ORD, DTW, BOS, MSP compared to major hubs in Europe. Just a guess.

Probably not. Plenty of airports in northern Europe without jetbridges. Like SFT: https://twitter.com/skellefteaairpt/sta ... 7409646592

Bostrom wrote:

kavok wrote:

It does seem that very rarely in the USA does one deplane remotely.

Might it have to do with weather? It does seem that more of the US tends to (generally) have more extreme weather than Europe. In particular, the winter weather seems to be more extreme with subzero temperatures in hubs like ORD, DTW, BOS, MSP compared to major hubs in Europe. Just a guess.

Probably not. Plenty of airports in northern Europe without jetbridges. Like SFT: https://twitter.com/skellefteaairpt/sta ... 7409646592

I frequently deplane remotely at KEF

hOMSaR wrote:

COSPN wrote:

USA has a law called ADA. Americans with disability act. “All reasonable efforts “ must be made so a wheelchair bound pax can fly without assistance or any prior notice .. if not they can seek corrective action .. no such law in other countries

Almost. ADA does not apply to airlines. However, there is the Air Carrier Access Act, which is sort of like ADA, but applies to airlines instead.

airlines. airports.
there's a difference.

Jshank83 wrote:

At PIE I had to wait an hour for a thunderstorm to pass through before they would let people off a plane because of a remote stand. If they had a normal jetway this wouldn't have happend.

That's not entirely accurate. I sat for over two hours at DFW once because they pulled the ground crew inside due to thunderstorm activity.

glbltrvlr wrote:

Jshank83 wrote:

At PIE I had to wait an hour for a thunderstorm to pass through before they would let people off a plane because of a remote stand. If they had a normal jetway this wouldn't have happend.

That's not entirely accurate. I sat for over two hours at DFW once because they pulled the ground crew inside due to thunderstorm activity.

From my thunderstorm experience, the airplane can still pull in if the gate is equipped with an electronic guidance system, and passengers can be unloaded via the jet bridge since no employees or passengers would be outdoors.

If the airplane has to be marshalled in to the gate, then it will have to wait for the storm to pass.

I think on rare occasions Dulles has some International arrivals arrive remote, and the mobile lounge will take passengers directly from plane to IAB. This usually only happens in peak travel and in the 2-6 pm rush hour time , when a plane lands and its designated gate is occupied and there are no more free gates.

In the past when ET operated out of Concourse D, since it has no secure customs walkway, the mobile lounge would come directly to plane, and take passengers to the IAB.

MIflyer12 wrote:

Themotionman wrote:

In an age where the majority of US airports are full at many times of the day...

That is not a factually correct statement. A few U.S. airports are heavily utilized much of the day: LAX, LGA, DCA among them. Some airports see a couple waves of use - they might have high gate utilization for a total of 2-3 hours a day. A majority of airports (that would be at least 200 with scheduled commercial passenger service) full at many times of day? That's just poor command of fact.

Why don't the few busy U.S. airports use remote stands? Two prominent reasons:

1. The busy airports don't have available apron space. (If they did, airports would be building concourses.)

2. U.S. passengers expect better. Remote stands are OK in Kona or Burbank where the weather is often good but I don't want them in Boston, Miami, or Dallas.

I recall in the Boston thread that during the summer the international terminal E has been so over capacity that they have to do this now. I also know DCA does this frequently during peak hours... I've heard people complain about never getting a jet bridge and I recommended flying during different hours because I haven't had a problem with this but I'm on a very different schedule than most people.

So I think the correct answer is that most U.S. airports are not over capacity like European airports tend to be. The select few US airports that are over capacity see the same results as European airports. But only at peak hours.

Both SJC and SFO have recently begun remote boarding due to gate shortages. It's a great idea if you ask me. Taking a bus to the plane is also looked down upon here in the States too.

KLMatSJC wrote:

Both SJC and SFO have recently begun remote boarding due to gate shortages. It's a great idea if you ask me. Taking a bus to the plane is also looked down upon here in the States too.

I really don't think there's any snobbishness with the bus trip. Care to elaborate? (not to be confused with my belief that people in the US have become intolerant of heat and sweat, demanding A/C everywhere; but are willing to dress for the cold)

Personally, I believe its all about the absolutist minimization of labour cost. Remote stand boarding requires a fair bit of extra human labour for simple guidance, supervision and ground transport. In the US, more so than any other high labor (or even higher!) cost country there is the singular drive by corporations and management to reduce, if not outright eliminate labour costs where possible. Airlines and airports would far rather fight over, wait on, and build multi million dollar terminal expansions to add a few gates than to accept an ongoing cost of a extra human time to operate remote stands.

Personally, I miss the charms of remote boarding.

Many US airports have more gates than they actually need at most times. Because of this, it is often not necessary to board from the apron. A lot of airports and new terminals in the US were designed from the get-go with jetway boarding in mind. That being said, there are still US airports where boarding from the apron is still common. If you're flying on Horizon out of PDX you'll most likely board and deplane on the apron and I've also boarded from the apron at CVG.

It's a combination of accessibility, weather and litigation risk due to injuries. That said, I have seen the remote stands at JFK being used, so it does happen. It's just uncommon and nobody would actually plan for it.

I personally like using airstairs from remote stands, but plenty of people can't make it up the stairs at all, and others can't do so safely. That's on the best days. An airport like JFK doesn't have many of those; what it does have a lot of is rain, snow and ice.

I board without jet bridge at BUR all the time. It's great to use the rear stairs and walk under the wing.
At LAX they have remote stands, which require bussing, but still have jet bridges.
The busses are a pain because it's just one more step, another delay, and you have to wait for the bus to fill to get going. When deboarding this just adds more time.

COSPN wrote:

USA has a law called ADA. Americans with disability act. “All reasonable efforts “ must be made so a wheelchair bound pax can fly without assistance or any prior notice .. if not they can seek corrective action .. no such law in other countries

Remote stands 100% can accommodate wheelchairs. At LAX, AA uses remote stands for some 787 ops and they pull up a wheelchair accessible ramp for deplaning to the tarmac + awaiting busses.

masgniw wrote:

Remote stands 100% can accommodate wheelchairs. At LAX, AA uses remote stands for some 787 ops and they pull up a wheelchair accessible ramp for deplaning to the tarmac + awaiting busses.

At LAX they don't even need to pull stands up. The remote pad west of Tom Bradley has semi permanent covered ramps installed.